Lexical verbs

The possessive forms can also be extended to intransitive and transitive lexical verbs. Consider for instance the following alternation:

(183) a. Bere ama hil da b. Ama hil zaio

his mother-abs die Aux-I mother-abs die Aux-dat-abs ‘His mother died’ ‘His mother died (on him)’

Motion verbs give rise to an interesting ambiguity when they occur in the dative-absolutive form. Consider the following cases:

(184) a. Eskutitza iritsi zaio b. Irakaslea joan zaio

letter-abs arrive-partc Aux-dat-abs teacher-abs go Aux-dat-abs ‘The letter got to him’ ‘The teacher went to him’

‘His letter arrived to its destination’ ‘His teacher left’

The dative argument can represent either a hidden possessor or a patient (a true argument of the verb). In the first case, the verb behaves as its intransitive form, where the absolutive constituent is the only argument of the verb and marks the patient, in the case of iritsi , or the theme (object in motion) in the case of joan . In the second case, the dative only marks a possessive-like relation with the absolutive¹⁷.

Verbs of inherently specified motion (such as igo “to climb”, jaitsi “to go dawm, to descend” or igaro “to cross” give rise to two sorts of transitive structures: on the one hand, transitive structures in which the object is a Theme (185a); on the other, affected transitive structures in which the object is some sort of measure (185b):

(185) a. Jonek patata zakuak jaitsi ditu Jon-erg potato sacks-abs take down Aux-T ‘Jon took down the potato sacks’

b. Jonek 50 metro jaitsi ditu urpean

Jon-erg 50 meters descend-partc Aux-T underwater ‘Jon descended 50 meters’

Possessive ditransitive constructions can only be construed from (186a), but not from (186b):

(186) a. Jonek patatak jaitsi dizkit Jon-erg potatoes-abs take down Aux-DT

‘Jon took down my potatoes/Jon took down the potatoes on my interest’

b. *Jonek 50 metro jaitsi dizkit urpean

Jon-erg 50 meters descend-partc Aux-DT underwater

Other modifiers may disambiguate between the two meanings. For instance, an ablative or locative postpositional phrase makes (2a) inequivocally non-possessive (but not (2b)):

(i) Eskutitza Madriletik/-n iritsi zitzaion

letter-abs Madrid-abl/loc arrive-partc Aux-I-dat-abs (past) ‘The letter got to him from/in Madrid’

Interestingly, adlative modifiers (and all those that are constructed from it) are compatible with both the possessive and the directional interpretations, in both (2a) and (2b):

(ii) Eskutitza Madrilera iritsi zaio

letter-abs Madrid-adl arrive Aux-I-dat-abs

‘The letter got to him to Madrid (to his address in madrid)’

‘His letter arrived to Madrid’

‘Jon descended 50 meters underwater on my interest’

Transitive verbs may also encode possession in the argument structure of the verb. In that case, the auxiliary becomes ditransitive. Consider for instance hautsi “to break”:

(187) a. Mikelek Jonen kotxea hautsi du

mikel-erg Jon-g car-abs break-partc Aux-T ‘Mikel broke Jon’s car’

b. Mikelek Joni (bere) kotxea hautsi dio

Mikel-erg Jon-dat his car break-partc Aux-DT ‘Mikel broke his car to Jon’

If the possession relation is of the inalienable sort, the noun phrase internal possessor must disappear:

(188) a. Mikelek Jonen sudurra hautsi du Mikel-erg Jon-g nose-abs break Aux-T ‘Mikel broke Jon’s nose’

b. Mikelek Joni (*bere) sudurra hautsi dio

Mikel-erg Jon-dat his nose-abs break-partc Aux-DT ‘Mikel broke Jon his nose’

The ban on the overt presence of the possessive in inalienable constructions dissappears if the possessed element is one in a set of identical elements:

(189) a. Mikelek Jonen beso bat hautsi du

Mikel-erg Jon-g arm one-abs break Aux-T ‘Mikel broke one of Jon’s arms’

b. Mikelek Joni bere beso(etako) bat hautsi dio

Mikel-erg Jon-dat his arm(loc-g) one break Aux-DT ‘Mikel broke Jon one of his arms’

There is a difference in meaning between the noun phrase internal possessive construction and the noun phrase external one in the case of inalienable possession. The noun phrase external construction implies that the dative-marked element and the absolutive-marked element enjoy material integrity (form a unit). Consider the contrast below:

(190) a. San Vicenteren besoa hautsi dute Saint Vincent-g arm-abs break Aux-T ‘They broke Saint Vincent’s arm’

b. San Vicenteri besoa hautsi diote Saint Vincent-dat arm-abs break Aux-DT ‘They broke Saint Vincent’s arm’

Whereas in (b) it is necessary that Saint Vincent has an arm as part of his material integrity which results broken as a result of pagan or heretic violence, in (a) this is not necessary: it could be for instance the relic in the cathedral of Valencia, involuntarily broken by some unattentive tourist. Family relations also give rise to an equivalent contrast:

(191) a. Jonen ama hil da b. Joni ama hil zaio

Jon-g mother-abs die Aux-I Jon-dat mother die Aux-dat-abs ‘Jon’s mother died’ ‘Jon’s mother died’

Whereas to utter (191b), Jon must be directly affected (and therefore alive) when his mother dies, this is not necessary to utter (191a). (191a) can be uttered in a situation in which Jon is dead a longtime ago, and now his mother dies.

In very colloquial (and stigmatized) registers of western Basque, inalienable reflexive relations can be expressed either by noun-phrase internal possession or by reflexivizing (ditransitivizing) the auxiliary:

(192) a. Mikelek besoa hautsi du

Mikel-erg arm-abs break Aux-T ‘Mikel broke his arm’

b. Mikel besoa hautsi da Mikel-abs arm-abs break-partc Aux-I ‘Mikel broke his arm’

There is a difference between the two: only the former, transitive, form admits agentive modifiers (181).

(193) a. Mikelek besoa nahita hautsi du

Mikel-erg arm-abs voluntarily break-partc Aux-T ‘Mikel broke his arm voluntarily’

b. ??Mikel besoa nahita hautsi da Mikel-abs arm-abs voluntarily break Aux-I ‘Mikel broke his arm voluntarily’

Surprisingly enough, these intransitive forms admit plurals in a very restricted way and when so, with marginal results:

(194) a. *Adiskideak besoak hautsi dira friends-abs arms-abs break Aux-I ‘My friends broke their arms’

b. ?Adiskideak besoa hautsi dira

friends-abs arm-abs break Aux-I(plural) ‘My friends broke (each) an arm’

c. *Adiskidea besoak hautsi da/dira

friend-abs arms-abs break Aux-I(sing/plural) ‘My friend broke his arms’

7. Verbs of saying, thinking and judging